Hi Has this patch been incorporated?
I ask as I'm getting "ERROR: Group 'smsc' may not contain field 'esm-class'." and there is no mention of it in the latest User's Guide. I got the source I'm using in December 2011. Regards Richard -----Original Message----- From: devel-boun...@kannel.org [mailto:devel-boun...@kannel.org] On Behalf Of Alan McNatty Sent: 14 September 2011 22:11 To: Alexander Malysh Cc: devel@kannel.org; Edgard Cruz Subject: Re: Making SMPP esm_class configurable? Ah that's great, thanks Alex. On Wed, 2011-09-14 at 22:08 +0200, Alexander Malysh wrote: > Hi Alan, > > after the long discussion this patch commited to SVN. > > Thanks, > Alexander Malysh > > Am 15.08.2011 um 09:35 schrieb Alan McNatty: > > > Thanks Nikos, > > > > That's good news since, thanks to Edgard for pointing out, I forgot > > to include gwlib/cfg.def in the patch. Updated patch attached. > > > > Cheers, > > Alan > > > > On Mon, 2011-08-15 at 04:29 +0300, Nikos Balkanas wrote: > >> I guess Alex M is busy. There are a few patches prior to yours that > >> wait for commission. Don't worry, he never misses a patch. He is > >> the gateway maintainer. > >> > >> > >> > >> BR, > >> Nikos > >> > >> On Mon, Aug 15, 2011 at 3:22 AM, Alan McNatty > >> <a...@catalyst.net.nz> > >> wrote: > >> Thanks Rene, > >> > >> Can anyone with commit access give a final nod of acceptance? > >> > >> On Tue, 2011-08-09 at 21:08 +0200, Rene Kluwen wrote: > >>> +1 for me as well. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> From: devel-boun...@kannel.org > >> [mailto:devel-boun...@kannel.org] On > >>> Behalf Of Nikos Balkanas > >>> Sent: Tuesday, 09 August, 2011 02:11 > >>> To: Alan McNatty > >>> Cc: devel@kannel.org > >>> Subject: Re: Making SMPP esm_class configurable? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Looks great! +1. > >>> > >>> > >>> Nikos > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Tue, Aug 9, 2011 at 2:59 AM, Alan McNatty > >> <a...@catalyst.net.nz> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> Thanks again Nikos, > >>> > >>> Yeah 0 and 3 are all I'm interested in - wasn't sure if > >> others wanted > >>> support for non-compliant things. > >>> > >>> Made changes as you suggested - please check out the > >> attached patch. > >>> > >>> Cheers, > >>> Alan > >>> > >>> On Mon, 2011-08-08 at 05:39 +0300, Nikos Balkanas wrote: > >>>> Hi Alan, > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Currently kannel doesn't support more modes. Therefore > >> test should > >>>> more specific: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> else if (esm_class != SMPP_STORE... && esm_class != > >> DEFAULT...)) // > >>>> use constants > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Also I see no need for panicking over a single smsc: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> error(0, "SMPP: Invalid esm_class mode \"5\" in > >> configuration. > >>>> Switching to \"Store and Forward\"); > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> There are still many hexadecimal references to the > >> userguide, and it > >>>> doesn't restrict choices. Therefore, I suggest the > >> following text: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Value for esm_class according to the SMPP spec. Accepted > >> values are > >>> 0 > >>>> (Default smsc mode) and 3 (Store and Forward). Defaults to > >> 3. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> HTH, > >>>> Nikos > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 5:01 AM, Alan McNatty > >> <a...@catalyst.net.nz> > >>>> wrote: > >>>> Thanks Nikos, > >>>> > >>>> See attached. > >>>> > >>>> Also just wanted to check thoughts the range check > >> (possibly > >>>> remove and > >>>> leave it open?). > >>>> > >>>> i.e. > >>>> + else if (esm_class > 0x03 || esm_class < 0) > >>>> + panic(0, "SMPP: Invalid esm_class > >> directive in > >>>> configuration."); > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, 2011-08-08 at 04:44 +0300, Nikos Balkanas > >> wrote: > >>>>> Hi Alan, > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Patch looks good. userguide needs some changes: > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> 1) Capitalize after periods (For example, For > >> default > >>> mode) > >>>>> 2) In configuration the value should be integer, > >> not hex > >>> (3 > >>>> not 03). > >>>>> cfg_get_integer doesn't understand hex (0xA5). > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> +1 > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Nikos > >>>>> > >>>>> On Mon, Aug 8, 2011 at 4:02 AM, Alan McNatty > >>>> <a...@catalyst.net.nz> > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>> patch attached. > >>>>> > >>>>> Votes / comments, etc? > >>>>> > >>>>> On Wed, 2011-08-03 at 09:39 +1200, Alan > >> McNatty > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>> Thanks Nikos/Alex for the feedback - I > >> will work > >>>> on config > >>>>> patch. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 23:10 +0300, > >> Nikos > >>> Balkanas > >>>> wrote: > >>>>>>> Hi Alan, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Just to clarify on what Alex says. > >> Some other > >>>> modes that > >>>>> the SMSc may > >>>>>>> support in default mode, are: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Datagram: UDP based, immediate best > >> effort > >>> high > >>>> throughput > >>>>> transmition with > >>>>>>> no retried, validity period or > >> storage. > >>> Similar > >>>> to UDP. > >>>>>>> Forward: Single transaction based, > >> for > >>> real-time > >>>>> applications, i.e. parking > >>>>>>> tickets, without storage, where > >> result is > >>>> returned in > >>>>> response. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Kannel doesn't support those, only > >> reliable > >>>> store and > >>>>> forward. Therefore the > >>>>>>> default mode wouldn't be > >> appropriate. > >>>>>>> Configuration would be fine for > >> those buggy > >>>> SMScs, that do > >>>>> store and > >>>>>>> forward, but do not accept it as an > >> option. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> BR, > >>>>>>> Nikos > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>>>>> From: "Alexander Malysh" > >> <amal...@kannel.org> > >>>>>>> To: "Alan McNatty" > >> <a...@catalyst.net.nz> > >>>>>>> Cc: "Nikos Balkanas" > >> <nbalka...@gmail.com>; > >>>>> <de...@vm1.kannel.org> > >>>>>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 12:29 > >> PM > >>>>>>> Subject: Re: Making SMPP esm_class > >>> configurable? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Hi, > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> please don't change default because > >> we want > >>> that > >>>> SMSC > >>>>> _store_ and _forward_ > >>>>>>> our message that > >>>>>>> is what we also tell SMSC. This > >> works in 99% > >>>> cases but > >>>>> sometimes buggy SMSCs > >>>>>>> don't accept this > >>>>>>> and rejects messages. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Please keep default as is and make > >> config > >>> option > >>>> for buggy > >>>>> SMSCs. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Thanks, > >>>>>>> Alex > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Am 02.08.2011 um 06:11 schrieb Alan > >> McNatty: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Sorry that should be > >>>> ESM_CLASS_SUBMIT_DEFAULT_SMSC_MODE. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Index: gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c > >>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> =================================================================== > >>>>>>>> --- gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c (revision > >> 4913) > >>>>>>>> +++ gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c (working > >> copy) > >>>>>>>> @@ -876,7 +876,7 @@ > >>>>>>>> * set the esm_class field > >>>>>>>> * default is store and > >> forward, plus > >>> udh > >>>> and rpi if > >>>>> requested > >>>>>>>> */ > >>>>>>>> - pdu->u.submit_sm.esm_class = > >>>>>>>> > >> ESM_CLASS_SUBMIT_STORE_AND_FORWARD_MODE; > >>>>>>>> + pdu->u.submit_sm.esm_class = > >>>>> ESM_CLASS_SUBMIT_DEFAULT_SMSC_MODE; > >>>>>>>> if > >> (octstr_len(msg->sms.udhdata)) > >>>>>>>> pdu->u.submit_sm.esm_class > >> = > >>>>> pdu->u.submit_sm.esm_class | > >>>>>>>> > >> ESM_CLASS_SUBMIT_UDH_INDICATOR; > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Tue, 2011-08-02 at 15:59 +1200, > >> Alan > >>>> McNatty wrote: > >>>>>>>>> Hi Nikos, > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> You mean simply change the > >> default: > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Index: gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>> > >> > >> =================================================================== > >>>>>>>>> --- gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c (revision > >> 4913) > >>>>>>>>> +++ gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c (working > >> copy) > >>>>>>>>> @@ -876,7 +876,7 @@ > >>>>>>>>> * set the esm_class field > >>>>>>>>> * default is store and > >> forward, plus > >>> udh > >>>> and rpi > >>>>> if requested > >>>>>>>>> */ > >>>>>>>>> - pdu->u.submit_sm.esm_class = > >>>>>>>>> > >> ESM_CLASS_SUBMIT_STORE_AND_FORWARD_MODE; > >>>>>>>>> + pdu->u.submit_sm.esm_class = > >>>>> ESM_CLASS_DEFAULT_SMSC_MODE; > >>>>>>>>> if > >> (octstr_len(msg->sms.udhdata)) > >>>>>>>>> > >> pdu->u.submit_sm.esm_class = > >>>>> pdu->u.submit_sm.esm_class | > >>>>>>>>> > >> ESM_CLASS_SUBMIT_UDH_INDICATOR; > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Anyone think we should have a > >> config > >>> option? > >>>> Or just > >>>>> happy to run with > >>>>>>>>> he above. I need to test myself > >> but is this > >>>> likely to > >>>>> be a compatibility > >>>>>>>>> breaker for anyone? > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>>>>> Alan > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> On Mon, 2011-08-01 at 07:13 > >> +0300, Nikos > >>>> Balkanas > >>>>> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>> Hi Alan, > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> According to the spec SMPP 5.0, > >> p 125, > >>>>>>>>>> > >> ESM_CLASS_SUBMIT_DEFAULT_SMSC_MODE is > >>>>>>>>>> the default esm class. That part > >> should be > >>>> patched in. > >>>>> As far as making > >>>>>>>>>> it > >>>>>>>>>> configurable, I have no > >> objections to it. > >>> A > >>>> few people > >>>>> over the years > >>>>>>>>>> have > >>>>>>>>>> had to manually patch it in. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> BR, > >>>>>>>>>> Nikos > >>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message ----- > >>>>>>>>>> From: "Alan McNatty" > >>> <a...@catalyst.net.nz> > >>>>>>>>>> To: <devel@kannel.org> > >>>>>>>>>> Sent: Monday, August 01, 2011 > >> 6:21 AM > >>>>>>>>>> Subject: Making SMPP esm_class > >>> configurable? > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Hi All, > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I found a thread on this from > >> back in Feb > >>>> 2005 > >>>>> (having received a query > >>>>>>>>>>> from provided now myself) .. > >> last word by > >>>> Alejandro > >>>>> and a lukewarm > >>>>>>>>>>> (+0 - > >>>>>>>>>>> +1) comment from Stipe about > >> committing > >>> if > >>>> patch > >>>>> provided. I would > >>>>>>>>>>> provide a config patch if > >> anyone would > >>> vote > >>>> in it's > >>>>> favour? > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Consider: > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> gw/smsc/smsc_smpp.c > >>>>>>>>>>> 875 /* > >>>>>>>>>>> 876 * set the esm_class > >> field > >>>>>>>>>>> 877 * default is store and > >> forward, > >>>> plus udh and > >>>>> rpi if requested > >>>>>>>>>>> 878 */ > >>>>>>>>>>> 879 > >> pdu->u.submit_sm.esm_class = > >>>>>>>>>>> > >> ESM_CLASS_SUBMIT_STORE_AND_FORWARD_MODE; > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> But the 'default' is surely > >>>>> ESM_CLASS_SUBMIT_DEFAULT_SMSC_MODE, no? > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> Cheers, > >>>>>>>>>>> Alan > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > >> > > > > <esm_class.patch> > Richard Crawshaw Software Developer Contact Group Telephone (UK): 0844 448 442 Telephone (ROI): 0818 286 795 Mobile : 0786 625 9418 Facsimile (UK): 0844 448 9090 Facsimile (ROI): 0818 444 223 Email: richard.craws...@the-contactgroup.com Web Site: http://www.contactgroup.com/ Twitter: http://twitter.com/@contactgroup EducationInvestor Awards - Technology Supplier of the Year 2011 WINNER This e-mail is intended for the above named only. It may contain private and confidential information or material that is privileged. If it has come to you in error you must take no action based upon it, nor must you copy or show it to anyone. Please return the message immediately to postmas...@contactgroup.com The Validity of any pricing information contained herein is 30 days unless otherwise stated. E & OE. Standard terms and conditions apply. Service by Contact Group. Registered in England No. 4125665. Registered office: Lonsdale House, 52 Blucher Street, Birmingham, B1 1QU. Data Protection No. Z7911829
